BEST DIET : LOSE WEIGHT WITH BEST TRICK

People go meat-free for a variety of reasons, ranging from environmental causes to health concerns. Another reason might be a genetically determined tendency to dislike the smell of meat, according to a recent study.

Researchers from Duke University Medical Center and colleagues in Norway found that about 70% of people have two functional copies of a gene linked to an odor receptor called OR7D4, which detects androstenone, a compound similar to testosterone that is found in male mammals, commonly in pork.

People with one or no functional copies of the gene can tolerate the scent of androstenone much better than people with two copies can. Reactions to androstenone vary broadly from person to person, the study found, with some comparing it to urine or sweat, while others saying it smelled sweet like vanilla. Some people have no reaction to it at all, and others who are highly sensitive think it’s repulsive.

(MORE: Eating Red, Processed Meat Raises Your Risk of Early Death)

Lead study author Dr. Hiroaki Matsunami, an associate professor of molecular genetics and microbiology at Duke, had identified the gene for the OR7D4 odor receptor in his previous research. Then, scientists in Norway contacted him to take a closer look at how certain genotypes might influence people’s perception of the smell of pork.

The Norwegians’ interest in the study was piqued because the European Union was considering a ban on castration of male pigs due to animal welfare concerns. Castration drastically reduces the amount of androstenone in pork, so the researchers were concerned about whether consumers would still find meat palatable if the ban were approved.

The researchers looked at a total of 23 participants. Thirteen were consumers and 10 were professional sensory assessors — people with sensitive noses who can successfully differentiate certain smells. Both groups smelled and tasted pork with varying levels of androstenone and were asked whether or not they liked it. Based on their reactions, the subjects were divided into sensitive and insensitive groups.

The study showed that all of the androstenone-sensitive participants had two functional copies of the OR7D4 gene, while those who were better able to tolerate the smell of pork had only one or no copies. “The data raise the possibility that more consumers will dislike male meat as a result of a castration ban,” the authors wrote in the study.

(MORE: Tips for a Healthy, Cancer-Free BBQ)

“It was surprising how this one gene could have such a clear influence on the preference of the food,” says Matsunami. “Taste is a complex mixture of taste, smell, texture and temperature. They combine to create a taste image in the brain. The olfactory component that plays the greatest role in whether you like the pork or not is determined by this gene.”

Matsunami says the findings are likely the first of many that will be discovered in the future. Perhaps studies can reveal how odor receptor genes function in populations such as vegetarians or those in the Middle East or near the Arctic, who do not eat pork or other similar meats. Further research could also be useful to product developers, who would probably like to know which receptors correspond to which flavors.

“We do not know all of the genetic components involved in preference, but we may find this in other kinds of food — even vegetables and fruit — and we can address the question, What is the genetic influence behind food preference?” says Matsunami.

The study was published online in the journal PLoS ONE.

MORE: Should We All Be Vegetarians?

People go meat-free for a variety of reasons, ranging from environmental causes to health concerns. Another reason might be a genetically determined tendency to dislike the smell of meat, according to a recent study.

Researchers from Duke University Medical Center and colleagues in Norway found that about 70% of people have two functional copies of a gene linked to an odor receptor called OR7D4, which detects androstenone, a compound similar to testosterone that is found in male mammals, commonly in pork.

People with one or no functional copies of the gene can tolerate the scent of androstenone much better than people with two copies can. Reactions to androstenone vary broadly from person to person, the study found, with some comparing it to urine or sweat, while others saying it smelled sweet like vanilla. Some people have no reaction to it at all, and others who are highly sensitive think it’s repulsive.

(MORE: Eating Red, Processed Meat Raises Your Risk of Early Death)

Lead study author Dr. Hiroaki Matsunami, an associate professor of molecular genetics and microbiology at Duke, had identified the gene for the OR7D4 odor receptor in his previous research. Then, scientists in Norway contacted him to take a closer look at how certain genotypes might influence people’s perception of the smell of pork.

The Norwegians’ interest in the study was piqued because the European Union was considering a ban on castration of male pigs due to animal welfare concerns. Castration drastically reduces the amount of androstenone in pork, so the researchers were concerned about whether consumers would still find meat palatable if the ban were approved.

The researchers looked at a total of 23 participants. Thirteen were consumers and 10 were professional sensory assessors — people with sensitive noses who can successfully differentiate certain smells. Both groups smelled and tasted pork with varying levels of androstenone and were asked whether or not they liked it. Based on their reactions, the subjects were divided into sensitive and insensitive groups.

The study showed that all of the androstenone-sensitive participants had two functional copies of the OR7D4 gene, while those who were better able to tolerate the smell of pork had only one or no copies. “The data raise the possibility that more consumers will dislike male meat as a result of a castration ban,” the authors wrote in the study.

(MORE: Tips for a Healthy, Cancer-Free BBQ)

“It was surprising how this one gene could have such a clear influence on the preference of the food,” says Matsunami. “Taste is a complex mixture of taste, smell, texture and temperature. They combine to create a taste image in the brain. The olfactory component that plays the greatest role in whether you like the pork or not is determined by this gene.”

Matsunami says the findings are likely the first of many that will be discovered in the future. Perhaps studies can reveal how odor receptor genes function in populations such as vegetarians or those in the Middle East or near the Arctic, who do not eat pork or other similar meats. Further research could also be useful to product developers, who would probably like to know which receptors correspond to which flavors.

“We do not know all of the genetic components involved in preference, but we may find this in other kinds of food — even vegetables and fruit — and we can address the question, What is the genetic influence behind food preference?” says Matsunami.

The study was published online in the journal PLoS ONE.

MORE: Should We All Be Vegetarians?

A new yearlong study of weight loss in overweight or obese women identified three key strategies for taking off unwanted pounds. The No. 1 tip for success? Writing down everything you eat or drink in a food journal.

Also: don’t skip meals and avoid eating out at restaurants too often. Underlying all three strategies is a sense of mindfulness, the authors say — being acutely aware and accountable for every morsel you eat. “It is difficult to make changes to your diet when you are not paying close attention to what you are eating,” said study author Dr. Anne McTiernan, director of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, in a statement.

The study of 123 sedentary postmenopausal women aged 50 to 75 randomly assigned participants to one of two weight-loss plans: restricted-calorie diet only, or exercise plus diet. The women filled out a series of questionnaires detailing their dietary intake, any eating-related weight-loss strategies they used, meal patterns and other behaviors like eating out or food journaling. They also filled out a 120-item food frequency questionnaire to track dietary changes from the beginning to the end of the one-year study.

On average, women in both groups lost weight, about 11% of their starting weight, or 19 lbs., which met the study’s goals. But McTiernan and her colleagues noticed that certain strategies the women used were associated with more weight loss.

(MORE: Boot Camp: Do Food Diaries Really Work?)

Women who kept food journals consistently lost about 6 lbs. more than those who did not, for example, likely because they held themselves responsible for everything they ate, the authors said. Food journaling isn’t easy or convenient, but done consistently, it can help steer dieters to more healthful choices since it allows people not only to keep track of calories, but also to gauge the overall quality of their diet. The authors advise dieters to write down absolutely everything in their food journals, including condiments, toppings and sauces, and always to keep track of portions. Women in the study were given printed booklets to use as their food journals, but people can use anything they like, from low-tech notebook and pen to ready-made apps on their iPhone or tablet.

Women who reported skipping meals lost nearly 8 lbs. less than women who ate regularly. The authors think that when people skip meals, they’re more likely to binge eat or eat fattening foods later on, causing them to eat more calories overall. Habitual meal-skipping or fasting could also affect the body’s metabolism, discouraging weight loss. “We also think skipping meals might cluster together with other behaviors. For instance, the lack of time and effort spent on planning and preparing meals may lead a person to skip meals and/or eat out more,” said McTiernan.

Indeed, women who ate out more lost less weight, especially those who frequently ate out for lunch. Women who had lunch out at least once a week lost about 5 lbs. less than those who didn’t eat out as often. Again, the problem is lack of awareness and control over what you’re eating, the authors said: you can’t control what goes into restaurant dishes or how they’re cooked, and you also have no say over portion size.

(MORE: Calorie vs. Calorie: Study Evaluates Three Diets for Staying Slim)

For anyone thinking of starting a food journal, the authors have some helpful tips:

• Be honest: record everything you eat
• Be accurate: measure portions, read labels
• Be complete: include details such as how the food was prepared, and the addition of any toppings or condiments
• Be consistent: always carry your food diary with you or use a diet-tracking application on your smartphone

“We think our findings are promising because it shows that basic strategies such as maintaining food journals, eating out less often and eating at regular intervals are simple tools that postmenopausal women — a group commonly at greater risk for weight gain — can use to help them lose weight successfully,” McTiernan said.

The study was published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

MORE: Study: The Best and Worst Food for Healthy Weight

PHOTOS: What Makes You Eat More Food?

If you want to protect your heart, stick to exercise and a healthy diet, and pass on the fish oil pills, says a new study.

For years, doctors and health experts have recommended taking fish oil supplements, rich in omega-3 fatty acids, to lower the risk of heart disease. But the latest study on the issue — an analysis of previous clinical trials on the effects of omega-3s — shows that the supplements don’t lower users’ risks of heart attack, stroke, sudden death or death from heart disease or any cause. Although the rates of these events were lower among those taking omega-3 supplements compared with those not taking them, the differences were not statistically meaningful, the authors said.

It’s not the first time that the cardiovascular benefits of fish oil have been questioned: another recent analysis of previous research found that the supplements didn’t prevent heart attack or stroke in people with heart disease. (Separately, other research has suggested that that pills have little effect on boosting memory in Alzheimer’s patients, reducing symptoms of the disease or improving thinking and verbal skills compared with placebo.)

(MORE: Fish Oil for Heart Attack Prevention: Is It a Myth?)

In the current analysis, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association and led by Dr. Moses Elisaf of the Lipid Disorders Clinic at the University Hospital of Ioannina in Greece, the scientists reviewed 20 studies dating back to 1989 that involved 68,680 participants. Volunteers in the studies, most of whom were heart patients, were randomly assigned to take either 1.5 g of omega-3 supplementation or a placebo every day for about two years. They were followed for heart events, including death, heart attack and stroke.

While the omega-3 users showed a 9% lower rate of heart-related death compared with the controls, and an 11% lower rate of heart attack, these differences were too small to attribute to the omega-3 pills.

The findings may lead to some confusion among people — both heart patients and those who are healthy but trying to avoid heart disease — who may be taking omega-3 supplements daily. While some early studies did show a significant benefit from taking fish oil pills, data from newer clinical trials weakened that effect. That may be because at least one early, important study did not blind participants or researchers, meaning that everyone knew who was taking omega-3s or placebo. Further, inconsistencies between the included trials, such as the dosages of supplement used or preexisting conditions among participants, may have contributed to the discouraging findings.

(MORE: Study: Fish Oil Pills Don’t Stall Alzheimer’s)

Much other past data showing benefits of omega-3s also came from studies that did not randomize participants into fish oil and placebo groups, and instead retrospectively compared heart events in people who chose to consume more omega-3 fats than others.

Another reason the current study failed to find a benefit may be that more people are using better treatments for heart disease these days, including cholesterol-lowering statin drugs. Elisaf says he wasn’t able to eliminate the potential influence of these medications in lowering rates of heart attack and death from heart disease overall. “We need more data in order to have a clear answer about the role of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in everyday clinical practice,” he says.

The authors acknowledge that additional research may help determine whether omega-3 supplements may still benefit people depending on their individual risk of heart disease, or if their diets are low in foods that are naturally rich in the fatty acids.

(MORE: Fish Oil Fail: Omega-3s May Not Protect Brain Health After All)

Currently the American Heart Association (AHA) advises people with high triglyceride levels to eat more fatty fish — the omega-3s in oily fish help boost good cholesterol and lower triglycerides — but to discuss supplementation with their doctor if they can’t get enough from their diet. The organization does not recommend the pills in general as a way to protect the heart.

Both the AHA and many doctors recommend eating more fish, however: everyone, including healthy people and heart patients, should eat at least two servings of fish per week to benefit from the omega-3 fats. “If people are taking supplements because their physician prescribed them, they should consult with their physician before stopping,” says Dr. Donna Arnett, president of the AHA and professor of epidemiology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. “But I would tell them they should not stop eating fish. The results of this study are about dietary supplements. So dietary sources of omega-3s may be different than supplements. They should not assume that dietary sources are not useful.”

Which means that the advice you’ve been hearing all along remains the same — eat more fish. It’s good for your heart.

MORE: Brain Food: Eating Fish May Lower Your Risk of Alzheimer’s

Alice Park is a writer at TIME. Find her on Twitter at @aliceparkny. You can also continue the discussion on TIME’s Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.

If you’re at high risk of having a heart attack, changing your diet can significantly lower your chances of heart disease. But how much can fruits and vegetables help someone who already has heart trouble?

Quite a bit, according to the latest study to investigate whether diet can reduce heart attack and stroke among those who are trying to avoid second or third events and are already taking medications to control blood pressure and cholesterol. In the largest-ever of its kind, published in the journal Circulation, a group of international researchers say healthy eating can have an added beneficial effect on the heart on top of the influence of heart-protecting medications.

“We encourage everyone to eat healthy. But especially high-risk patients, we want them to know: Take your medication, but modify your diet as well,” says lead study author Mahshid Dehghan, a researcher at the Population Health Research Institute in Hamilton, ON, in Canada, one of the centers involved in the study. “Some people think that if medication lowers their blood pressure, healthy eating doesn’t matter. We want them to know that this is wrong,” she says.

MORE: The Oz Diet

The study involved more than 30,000 adults aged 55 and older, all with a history of heart disease, stroke, or diabetes with organ damage and living in 40 different countries. All were enrolled in one of two different drug trials to test the effectiveness of blood-pressure medications. As part of the trials, the patients answered detailed questionnaires about their lifestyles, including diet: How often did they typically eat fish? fruits and vegetables? nuts? red meat? foods that had been deep-fried, or contained trans fats? They were also asked about behaviors that have been linked to heart disease such as smoking, alcohol consumption and lack of physical activity. Based on their responses, Dehghan and her colleagues assigned each participant an overall diet-quality score that reflected the composite quality of his food intake.

Five years later, it was clear that participants with diet-quality scores in the top 20% experienced far better heart health than those in the bottom 20%. They enjoyed a 19% drop in their risk of stroke, a 14% reduction in the risk of heart attack, and a 35% reduction in the risk of death from any heart-related cause. And these effects remained consistent among those who did and did not take medication, and at different doses of the drugs. “Regardless of type of medication, or combination of medications, we observed a beneficial effect of healthy eating,” Dehghan says.

MORE: The 31 Healthiest Foods of All Time (With Recipes)

In other words, the drugs work. But healthy eating helps a good deal too — and eating well while taking regular medication was associated with the best outcomes of all.

Dehghan says the new study is the most comprehensive research of its kind to date. That’s because of large size of the study population, but also the fact that it includes participants from 40 countries that represent not just developed and higher resource nations such as those in Europe and North America, but also middle-income countries in East Asia, South America, and the Middle East.

And because the study participants were asked to give detailed information about their medications, how faithfully they took them, and their lifestyle choices outside of what they ate, the researchers could adjust for potential factors that could also influence heart disease risk. For example, healthier eaters may experience fewer heart problems because they also tend to smoke less or exercise more or take their medications more diligently. But even after they controlled for these behaviors, the study showed a strong link between healthy diet and heart health.

MORE: For Better Heart Health, Exercise Harder, Not Longer

That convinces Dehghan that it’s worthwhile for doctors to talk to their heart-disease patients about the importance of healthy food, even if they are keeping their blood pressure and cholesterol in check with prescription drugs. She says that healthy eating is not about one single nutrient or food group, but instead, about the big picture of providing the body a balanced and diverse source of nutrients. “People can eat healthy or unhealthy three times a day, so if you modify your diet it can have a big impact,” she says. Enough for even heart patients to avoid additional heart attacks, strokes or even early death from heart disease.

If you’re at high risk of having a heart attack, changing your diet can significantly lower your chances of heart disease. But how much can fruits and vegetables help someone who already has heart trouble?

Quite a bit, according to the latest study to investigate whether diet can reduce heart attack and stroke among those who are trying to avoid second or third events and are already taking medications to control blood pressure and cholesterol. In the largest-ever of its kind, published in the journal Circulation, a group of international researchers say healthy eating can have an added beneficial effect on the heart on top of the influence of heart-protecting medications.

“We encourage everyone to eat healthy. But especially high-risk patients, we want them to know: Take your medication, but modify your diet as well,” says lead study author Mahshid Dehghan, a researcher at the Population Health Research Institute in Hamilton, ON, in Canada, one of the centers involved in the study. “Some people think that if medication lowers their blood pressure, healthy eating doesn’t matter. We want them to know that this is wrong,” she says.

MORE: The Oz Diet

The study involved more than 30,000 adults aged 55 and older, all with a history of heart disease, stroke, or diabetes with organ damage and living in 40 different countries. All were enrolled in one of two different drug trials to test the effectiveness of blood-pressure medications. As part of the trials, the patients answered detailed questionnaires about their lifestyles, including diet: How often did they typically eat fish? fruits and vegetables? nuts? red meat? foods that had been deep-fried, or contained trans fats? They were also asked about behaviors that have been linked to heart disease such as smoking, alcohol consumption and lack of physical activity. Based on their responses, Dehghan and her colleagues assigned each participant an overall diet-quality score that reflected the composite quality of his food intake.

Five years later, it was clear that participants with diet-quality scores in the top 20% experienced far better heart health than those in the bottom 20%. They enjoyed a 19% drop in their risk of stroke, a 14% reduction in the risk of heart attack, and a 35% reduction in the risk of death from any heart-related cause. And these effects remained consistent among those who did and did not take medication, and at different doses of the drugs. “Regardless of type of medication, or combination of medications, we observed a beneficial effect of healthy eating,” Dehghan says.

MORE: The 31 Healthiest Foods of All Time (With Recipes)

In other words, the drugs work. But healthy eating helps a good deal too — and eating well while taking regular medication was associated with the best outcomes of all.

Dehghan says the new study is the most comprehensive research of its kind to date. That’s because of large size of the study population, but also the fact that it includes participants from 40 countries that represent not just developed and higher resource nations such as those in Europe and North America, but also middle-income countries in East Asia, South America, and the Middle East.

And because the study participants were asked to give detailed information about their medications, how faithfully they took them, and their lifestyle choices outside of what they ate, the researchers could adjust for potential factors that could also influence heart disease risk. For example, healthier eaters may experience fewer heart problems because they also tend to smoke less or exercise more or take their medications more diligently. But even after they controlled for these behaviors, the study showed a strong link between healthy diet and heart health.

MORE: For Better Heart Health, Exercise Harder, Not Longer

That convinces Dehghan that it’s worthwhile for doctors to talk to their heart-disease patients about the importance of healthy food, even if they are keeping their blood pressure and cholesterol in check with prescription drugs. She says that healthy eating is not about one single nutrient or food group, but instead, about the big picture of providing the body a balanced and diverse source of nutrients. “People can eat healthy or unhealthy three times a day, so if you modify your diet it can have a big impact,” she says. Enough for even heart patients to avoid additional heart attacks, strokes or even early death from heart disease.

Hearts and tumors may actually share more in common than we think.

Following heart-healthy recommendations can also protect you from cancer, according to the latest study from the American Heart Association (AHA). Eating a healthy diet, exercising and maintaining your weight have long been ways to fend off heart disease, but researchers at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago report in the journal Circulation that following the AHA’s Life’s Simple 7 steps to reduce heart disease can also cut cancer risk.

The Life’s Simple 7 include:

• Being physically active
• Keeping a healthy weight
• Eating a healthy diet
• Maintaining healthy cholesterol levels
• Keeping blood pressure down
• Regulating blood sugar levels
• Not smoking

(MORE: Berries Linked to Lower Heart Disease Among Women)

Researchers studied the health records of 13,253 white and African-American men and women who were involved in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study, which tracked the seven risk factors and the participants’ health outcomes since 1987. At the beginning of the study, the volunteers were examined and  interviewed about which healthy behaviors they followed.

Twenty years later, the researchers reviewed hospital records and cancer registries and discovered that 2,880 of the participants were diagnosed with cancer of the lung, colon or rectum, prostate and breast. Those who were diagnosed, however, tended to follow fewer of the Life’s Simple 7 behaviors than those who did not develop cancer. People who followed six of the seven health metrics had a 51% lower cancer risk than the participants who did not meet any of the steps. The relationship held even after the scientists accounted for the effect of smoking on cancer risk; when smoking was taken out of the equation, participants who followed five to six of the health steps had a 25% lower cancer risk.

(MORE: For Better Heart Health Exercise Harder, Not Longer)

“This adds to the strong body of research suggesting that it is never late to change, and that if you make changes like quitting smoking and improving your diet, you can reduce your risk for both cardiovascular disease and cancer,” said lead study author Laura J. Rasmussen-Torvik, an assistant professor at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in a statement.

That’s welcome, and helpful news amid the current sea of conflicting and confusing data about preventing chronic disease. In this case, the message is actually quite simple — certain healthy habits, such as eating foods low in fat, sugar and calories, and exercising regularly, can lower your risk of two of the major killers of American adults. “There are many health messages presented in the popular press and frequent (and sometimes contradictory) reports of novel risk factors for disease,” Rasmussen-Torvik and her colleagues write. “These messages sometimes confuse consumers, leaving them unsure on the most important steps to take for disease prevention. We hope that emphasizing a unified approach from multiple chronic disease advocacy groups, promoting some common steps for disease prevention, will be particularly effective in helping the public to prevent chronic disease.”

MORE: A Happy, Optimistic Outlook May Protect Your Heart